Return-Path: <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j3GH0PG19785; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:00:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:00:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <368DB9A2.09B5731B.0A349A3F@aol.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: AWilder106@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2977] Re: Shared Priorities? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Status: O Content-Length: 1821 Lines: 13 Hmmm. A pattern that is norm free. Well, a norm is an average, or a model. A model is by definition normative. I think social norms are kind of agreements that enable us to get along. I certainly don't disapprove of teaching norms, they are very useful. How they intersect with other patterns of living is what I am getting at. These other patterns are what I call "ordinary," and they take in a huge range of behaviors. I think it is possible to think deeply and come up with some basic principles to live by, and also to work out and refine hypotheses in daily life. Test out assumptions. A good theorist--this may be a sidetrack--is always looking for disconfirming evidence to chip away at the theory. This strengthens the theory (where it doesn't demolish it all together). You imply, I think, that my single voice can be drowned out by the voices of dozens, hundreds, of people who have collaborated to construct the norms of EFF. And because they are many, and I am one,their opinions are more valid. Let's think about those many people whose opinions were condensed into EFF. They did not all have the same opinions, their opinions were all over the place, I am fairly sure. The people who put EFF finally together chose the central tendencies of all those opinions. There were some people probably who were far away from the central tendency, they were outliers, I am one of those. I raised questions about EFF as it exists on paper, only. I thought I was clear, but maybe I wasn't, that I think the most powerful way of understanding EFF must be experiential. In fact, you, Meta, and I am sure dozens of others, know about this side of EFF while I do not. You and others are speaking from the words AND the experience. What I need is to find out about the experiential side. Andrea
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:21 EST